"Downing Street 'covered up serious Trident missile malfunction' weeks before crucial Commons vote:


Downing Street has been accused of covering up a Trident missile malfunction weeks before a crucial Commons vote on the future of the submarine-based missile system."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7539841.html


It is frightening to think that even now to this day, that something like this could still happen - this was sheer dumb luck that the missile in question was not somehow actually armed or whatever. With all that is going on - I still can't believe that there is still such a possibility of such a thing being possible.

What is more scary - what if this was a NATO exercise in the baltics? Tensions are already high and now all of the sudden a reckless action could quickly escalate.

-edit

"Fallon dodges questions on whether Britain fired a Trident nuke missile towards US " - "Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has backed the Trident nuclear missile system amid allegations a test-fired rocket malfunctioned and headed towards the US. " - https://www.rt.com/uk/374776-labour-...t-malfunction/

"Britain's May faces pressure after reports of Trident test malfunction" - "A test firing of an unarmed British nuclear Trident missile from a submarine malfunctioned last June, the Sunday Times reported, prompting questions about why Prime Minister Theresa May did not tell parliament ahead of a vote on renewing the submarines."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-br...KBN1550WX?il=0

Well, at least they had the good sense to MAKE SURE it was unarmed.....

... and yet we still somehow think that these "infernal machines," for which we have spent ##CLASSIFIED## currency-units, will somehow "protect us."

Again what disturbs me is what I asked before - what if this were done in the Baltics? It wouldn't really matter if it were a dummy missile, IT WAS FROM A NUCLEAR SUB - and had it somehow veered off towards a Russian carrier or towards Russian territory then what? - this kind of thing is just beyond scary. Also I did watch the video on RT - and if that person is to be believed, that is just even MORE terrifying - that kind of failure rate would be expected if this was a third world dictatorship i.e. DPRK - hell I know Russia has had missile failures before, but this just give THEM a run for their money.

I am also well aware of so many 'oops' moments that could have ended quite differently - such as a plane carrying nukes going down in North Carolina - luckily the two bombs DIDN'T go off, but still.....

Maybe a little less grog on those ships matey.

....You lost me there..

-edit

"Trident: Defence Secretary refuses to give test missile details"

Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon has refused to divulge "operational details" of what happened during a Trident test last June.

It is reported that a missile went off course, but the government has not confirmed or denied this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38714047

Is that a submarine with a nuclear engine, or a submarine carrying nuclear missiles? I feel like those two things get mixed up a lot.

One failure can't be a "rate", are we talking about other failures?

Well I thought it was assumed that since it was a nuclear sub, then it stands to reason that there would be nuclear missiles on board as well?

Well considering what William Mcneilly states, I would have associated this maybe from aging Russian equipment, not from a supposed 1st world power; skip to 1:30m

https://news.usni.org/2014/07/01/hun...nd-alcohol-sea



https://warontherocks.com/2014/08/ru...nking-culture/

From what I read on Wikipedia, having nuclear missiles implies nuclear powered, but not the other way around:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_submarine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballis...marine#Purpose
So we're fine, if it veered towards Russia it's super stealthy and wouldn't have gotten caught

Haven't watched any videos, but I gather the answer is yes, there's more than the one failure.

I could very well be over-estimating the Russians, then again you could be under-estimating them, I am not willing to take such a chance though - would you?

Even a weak animal can become very dangerous when provoked or cornered, and with regards to Russia they have been remarkably patient and held back quite a bit considering NATO - and it seems some in the west are leaving out certain details, in order to fit the Russian aggression: http://theweek.com/articles/620713/w...sia-nato-ropes - and Major International Treaties of the 20th Century